6 ms·

I think phones were similarly hated, but diluted over a ~15 year period as they were gradually introduced to society. AI is happening much faster, practically a

by csallen 25d ago

I think phones were similarly hated, but diluted over a ~15 year period as they were gradually introduced to society. AI is happening much faster, practically all at once. And I think the extent of the hatred in part is also due to how widespread it is, not just how fast it's spread. It's everywhere. If you watch YouTube, you're hearing people narrating scripts read by AI. Social media posts are written with AI. Students are cheating with AI. AI is threatening to take jobs from knowledge workers. AI is copying the work of artists and creators. Etc. There's almost nothing it doesn't touch. (I'm not talking here about why it's hated or whether it should be hated. More just commenting on the remarkability of how widely it's disliked.)

newsomix9xl 25d ago
Its not just pervasiveness, but how it's characterized. "AI data centers are raising electricity rates." or "AI pivot is the reason for 10% layoffs". It's rare that you read "AI cures cancer" or "AI reducing inflation" or "AI raising standard of living for blue collar workers". The relentless drum beat on AI news is negative even when there is zero - literally zero - evidence around the speculation. To wit: AI will destroy all of humanity, or the related "AI will become sentient and lead to threat to human civ" etc. This is pure negative science fiction (related to Musk's AI will create a utopia in which everything will be free).
- dofm 25d ago
  > To wit: AI will destroy all of humanity, or the related "AI will become sentient and lead to threat to human civ" etc. This is pure negative science fiction All of this is true, but it is the two main AI companies themselves who created and marketed this narrative. It's their negative science fiction. It is part of the marketing campaign they are running that is the foundation of arguments that the government should be their funding backstop (OpenAI have made this explicit), that open weights AI is more dangerous, that China is a threat, that only they can solve the problems they themselves are creating. (After all, if China can only do what they are doing by distilling American models, which is what they claim, then the big American AI labs could shut down the risk for decades by downing tools out of principle.) This whole fear scenario is more or less the entire basis for Anthropic's original elevator pitch, after all: that AI is dangerous and that they will specialise in making it safe. Churlish to blame the media for accurately reporting what Musk, Amodei and Altman have said and the sort of blasé, detached, sociopathic way they say it.
  - newsomix9xl 24d ago
    I don't disagree that they promote this narrative (I don't think they invented this science fiction but that's not important.) I agree its a marketing campaign or, I suspect, a legislative campaign to generate federal (and importantly NOT state level) favorable legislation giving them broad immunity, tax exempt status, trade barriers or whatever else they want. So yes "self serving". I still say its false and worth refuting even if they promote it. Maybe especially since they promote it: you amplify their agenda by repeating their PR.

by csallen 25d ago

newsomix9xl 25d ago

Its not just pervasiveness, but how it's characterized. "AI data centers are raising electricity rates." or "AI pivot is the reason for 10% layoffs". It's rare that you read "AI cures cancer" or "AI reducing inflation" or "AI raising standard of living for blue collar workers". The relentless drum beat on AI news is negative even when there is zero - literally zero - evidence around the speculation. To wit: AI will destroy all of humanity, or the related "AI will become sentient and lead to threat to human civ" etc. This is pure negative science fiction (related to Musk's AI will create a utopia in which everything will be free).

dofm 25d ago
> To wit: AI will destroy all of humanity, or the related "AI will become sentient and lead to threat to human civ" etc. This is pure negative science fiction All of this is true, but it is the two main AI companies themselves who created and marketed this narrative. It's their negative science fiction. It is part of the marketing campaign they are running that is the foundation of arguments that the government should be their funding backstop (OpenAI have made this explicit), that open weights AI is more dangerous, that China is a threat, that only they can solve the problems they themselves are creating. (After all, if China can only do what they are doing by distilling American models, which is what they claim, then the big American AI labs could shut down the risk for decades by downing tools out of principle.) This whole fear scenario is more or less the entire basis for Anthropic's original elevator pitch, after all: that AI is dangerous and that they will specialise in making it safe. Churlish to blame the media for accurately reporting what Musk, Amodei and Altman have said and the sort of blasé, detached, sociopathic way they say it.
- newsomix9xl 24d ago
  I don't disagree that they promote this narrative (I don't think they invented this science fiction but that's not important.) I agree its a marketing campaign or, I suspect, a legislative campaign to generate federal (and importantly NOT state level) favorable legislation giving them broad immunity, tax exempt status, trade barriers or whatever else they want. So yes "self serving". I still say its false and worth refuting even if they promote it. Maybe especially since they promote it: you amplify their agenda by repeating their PR.